This, from the closing argument from the ex wife’s lawyers:
“Mr. Jones is like a cult leader. And we’ve seen the horrific damage cult leaders do to their followers.”

]]>By: CKavahttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304348
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 05:30:56 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304348You might be right but there seems to be decent evidence from other countries that gun bans substantially reduce, if not almost entirely eliminate, mass shootings. The UK and Australia banned most firearms in 1996 after mass shootings and gun violence deaths/suicides dropped substantially. The US again stands out as a severe outlier in this regard when compared against other Western democracies and I don’t think it can be explained by things like access to mass media and the 24 hour news cycle because they also exist in other countries that experience nothing like what America is going through. You can never prevent people from improvising weapons, using things like knives/cars to attack people, but you can reduce gun related deaths by reducing their prevalence in a society.
]]>By: Sophiehttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304312
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 03:42:14 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304312I disagree that trying to change the culture offers no real solutions, I think it does. Especially given the history. Mass shootings like this are relatively new phenomena. Fully automatic weapons were previously legal, and we didn’t have school shootings and other mass shootings constantly. The most deadly attacks have happened in recent years.

What’s happened in the last few decades is a dramatic shift in the culture. People who want to go out in a blaze of glory can now do it, and they know they will get infamy and attention for it. I really believe that if you take away the guns without fixing this cultural issue people will just improvise weapons or illegally acquire firearms.

I understand fully that for at least around half the population the mere suggestion that guns should be better controlled, let alone banned is a red line that cannot be crossed.

I actually think it is a terrible tragedy because the people who suffer most from the prevalence of guns in the US are US citizens. So it is in many respects a self-inflicted wound, and one that is exacerbated by politically motivated bans on various aspects of research relating to guns.

I can see the pragmatic value in focusing on issues where there is the potential for some traction, so on those grounds I can understand advocating to focus on things like mental health provision. Unfortunately, such measures offer no real solution to the problem. To an outsider the situation in the US is something akin to an individual repeatedly stabbing themselves, getting sad about all the blood and applying small band-aids to the edge of the wounds before returning back to the business of self-stabbing. I don’t intend that analogy to be crass, I genuinely see it as a tragedy, especially when children are involved.

]]>By: Sophiehttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304265
Thu, 27 Apr 2017 01:03:09 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304265Since you are not an American you probably don’t see that it’s much easier to pursue literally any other avenue. Taking people’s guns away, or passing laws to restrict the type of weapons they can have access to, is met with widespread resistance across all levels of government. Congress just repealed an Obama era law that prevented people from
Getting guns who had mental disorders so severe that they could not manage their own finances.

The Trump people have apparently expressed interest in upping some mental health and addiction services, so for the next 4-8 years we should probably focus on those avenues. Gun control legislation isn’t going to get passed any time soon, it will probably get loosened.

Cross-cultural evidence strongly suggests that the relative ease of gaining access to guns in a society is a significant predictor of gun related violence. There are other factors certainly, but comparing the US with other developed Western countries the US is a dramatic outlier in relation to gun violence.

I constantly find it surprising that Americans are so reluctant to acknowledge what appears to be such an obvious relationship but it seems that the right to bear arms has been elevated to something of a sacred value in American culture. So that any suggestion that having guns available to the public is likely damaging to the safety of people living in that society is treated almost as if it is a kind of blasphemy.

It also remains a false dichotomy to suggest that the option is improve mental health services or introduce stronger regulations on gun ownership. Both options can be pursued independently and, moreover, as apparently everyone in the thread agrees mental illness is not actually the dominant factor in the majority of cases of gun related violence or mass shootings. So I don’t quite follow the logic being advanced that the No.1 priority to stop either mass shootings/gun related violence is to improve mental health services.

]]>By: Sophiehttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304056
Wed, 26 Apr 2017 16:54:11 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304056Either way, regardless of what you believe, this is a complex issue. Tougher gun control might not help as much as we like think. Many of the firearms used in these attacks are legally purchased, even if you change the laws something like the Aurora shooting would still happen, the man had his place rigged with explosives and stockpiles of firearms, I’m sure he would have had no problem illegally obtaining firearms.

I think a more compelling argument can be made for increasing mental health services, hotlines and destigmatizing mental health issues. Community outreach, more counseling at schools and just watching out for warning signs and following up with people. Any overall change to the culture, right down to rethinking how we cover these events on the news.

The problem is not just due to easy access to guns. Lots of places have guns. Most American gun owners do not do these things. The NRA has a small point. The NRA gets a lot of stuff wrong though and feeds the gun loving, shoot and ask questions later, culture in this country.

It’s like black lives matter. Cops have had guns for a while. They need guns. Is the reason there are systematic problems with their mistreatment of black people, because they have access to guns? Should cops not have guns? Or do they need some emotional counseling, better training, sensitivity training?

Cops with guns aren’t the problem. Neither is the stimuli. We have all seen the videos of unarmed black men being shot. Not all cops shoot when presented with the same stimuli. The problem is not with cops in general or their access to firearms. The problem lies within the small subset of this group that is exceptional, that reacts and kills a man who is unarmed and posing no threat to anyone. This small subset is also just the symptom of a larger problem, that has to do with the culture and training. There are many poorly trained officers out there right now, who will over react to neutral/ambiguous stimuli to a fatal result. Accidents happen, but they aren’t all accidents. There was a reason why the former administration took this issue seriously and was in the process of reforming many police departments. They found evidence systematic racial bias and corrupt police departments.

]]>By: Sophiehttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304021
Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:42:42 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304021Being socially isolated is also a problem. And highly correlated with many different mental disorders. Maybe mass shooters just need friends. Some social network. A shoulder to cry on. And be told it’s okay to cry.
]]>By: Sophiehttp://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/is-alex-jones-faking/#comment-304011
Wed, 26 Apr 2017 15:10:22 +0000http://theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=9924#comment-304011tl;dr: What separates us from mass murderers is not extreme circumstances; but rather, extremely inappropriate reactions to universally-experienced stressful stimuli.

CKava,

…earlier posts do not give the impression that you original argument was that mental illness is a minor factor in a minority of cases. Instead, it reads as if you are implying it is the most important factor that is being unjustly ignored…

Roll the tape… the first few times when I spoke about mental illness here I said:

[about pizzagate] Arguing that one mentally ill person was motivated to do something like that by Alex Jones is a weak argument. It’s like saying that the dark knight shooter was influenced by all the batman posters and stuff in his room. Or that the columbine shooting was motivated by whatever. Or the Orlando shooting was motivated solely by radical Islamic terror, when later we find out he would frequent the club, use gay hook up apps all the time, and he had all sorts of other problems other than an internal homoerotic/homophobia struggle. The common thread in all these attacks is mental health issues. Sometimes people who need professional help, go out and do bad things. Yes if some of them happen to listen to Alex Jones, then technically they get some ideas from him, is he the cause of this violence? No.

I referenced specific attacks BY NAME. I did not make arguments about all mentally ill people. I’m clearly arguing that batman didn’t push the dark knight shooter, and that ISIS propaganda did not cause the Orlando shooting. In the same way, fake news doesn’t directly cause mass shootings. (Pizzagate is the only shooting so far connected to fake news and no one was injured.)

If you think these mass shootings are anomalous, go down the list of the worse mass shootings in history, check out the mental health history, legal defenses used and expert analysis.

It’s important to consider why I said these things. This was in direct response to Daedalus, Rickk and others arguing that infowars exists to radicalize people to commit violent acts. They argued a direct connection and some went as far as to say that the alt right exists for that purpose. They also argued that Alex Jones intentionally incites his viewers to commit violent acts. That he caused the pizzagate shooting etc.

You may have confused me with someone else here, or not read carefully. Seeing as this discussion is a week old now and has 120+ comments, and this is your first time posting in it, it’s doubtful you’ve been paying attention.

This was just one vein of my argument against their theories about Alex Jones. I also argued that the alt right exists to cash in on the alternative news narrative. And considering that one of the cofounders of Breitbart is now in the White House advising the president, there are also political motivations to the alt right websites.
— —

Steven Novella,

Ease of access to firearms is just one variable. Yes of course certain people should not have guns. But no it’s not the entire world that acts violently when faced with a mental break down.

Millions of people go through an emotional crisis/breakdown, as a result of a messy breakup, personal loss or getting fired. Many of them have easy access to weapons (guns, knives, cars). Very few of those individuals go on a killing spree. Essentially all of the ones who go on a killing spree are men. Men who are both more impulsive, (but not diagnosed), and men who have their judgment compromised by a deeply felt emotional grievance.

Impulsivity is a mental attribute. Some people have more of it than others. If you have a clinical amount you can get diagnosed with a disorder. But we have to consider that there are many undiagnosed people out there who have just not been in the right situation to highlight their issues yet, to force a run in with the law or counseling.

A grievance is also mental. Many shooters are pushed to the edge after a breakup. There is nothing that really significantly physically happens when your girlfriend breaks up with you. She just walks out. She previously walked out of your place before, but this time is more significant.

The difference is emotional, mental and completely abstract. She didn’t physically do anything to you, you are free to find a new girl, she didn’t lock you in a cage or beat the crap out of you. She just said goodbye and left the place. It’s the same thing with being fired, what hurts is the mental/emotional worries that come into mind, not the physical reality of the situation.

Given the fact that millions of people experience the same stimulus and do not go on killing spree, clearly the problem must lie with the exceptional few who snap. Since impulsivity and grievances are completely mental things, we can easily argue that yes there is a significant contribution that these things have on the situation. Highly impulsive individuals, with poor emotional coping mechanisms account for the majority of these acts.

How many videos are there online of everyday normal interactions, quickly escalating to death threats? I have witnessed a few in my college bar. When push comes to shove, death threads are uttered.

Men in this culture are taught to be tough and not express their sensitive emotions. They also seek out medical attention less than women and put off going to the doctor. Mental health is also stigmatized. If these men called a mental health hotline and got professional help maybe less shootings would happen?

In conclusion, everyone at some point in their lives is going to experience the same stimulus that has pushed others to commit mass murder. Some will have a weapon nearby. Very few will act violently. If you have problems with impulsivity and healthy emotional expression, you are more at risk. If you have a mental disorder that highlights those attributes you are at an even higher risk.

What separates us from mass murderers is not extreme circumstances; but rather, extremely inappropriate reactions to universally-experienced stressful stimuli.

I would argue we should not sell guns to people who are, at baseline, diagnosably mentally ill (at least certain kinds and degrees of mental illness that would make them a threat to themselves or others).

This is very different from saying we should not sell guns to anyone who, at any time in their lives, might be pushed to an extreme and irrational act by circumstances (i.e., the entire world population).